Re: [Slim] Shortening humintlang

Why is the "human" part an important distinguisher? Accept-Language refers to the same type of language: natural language content. While our machines are getting better about generating and responding to natural languages, the point of these interfaces is always human interaction. Why not just 'lang'? It's short and it's consistent with usage elsewhere.

Addison Phillips
Principal SDE, I18N Architect (Amazon)
Chair (W3C I18N WG)

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.

From: SLIM [mailto:slim-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Brian Rosen
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 7:27 AM
To: Gunnar Hellström <gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se>
Cc: slim@ietf.org; Natasha Rooney <nrooney@gsma.com>
Subject: Re: [Slim] Shortening humintlang

I don't have any problem shortening the name, but I do think retaining "human" is important because we have always had problems confusing the "Accept-Language" header.

How about 'hlang'?  Or 'hilang' if you must.

Brian

On Feb 22, 2017, at 6:17 AM, Gunnar Hellström <gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se<mailto:gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se>> wrote:

Den 2017-02-22 kl. 11:59, skrev Natasha Rooney:

Hi all,

We had this request from the Gen-ART reviewer for raft-ietf-slim-negotiating-human-language-06:

C. "humintlang" seems long to me

Given the excessive length of SDP in practice, it seems to me that a
shorter attribute name would be desirable.  E.g., "humlang" as was
used in some previous versions.  Or is there a coordinated usage with
other names in the "hum*lang" pattern?

Wdyt?
I have also had thoughts in the same direction.  Especially when we quite late decided to have only one language tag value per attribute, the consumption of characters for SDP increased dramatically.
It is a good habit to have attribute names that are real words, but we have problems inventing such names for this case.

The "hum" part is in fact redundant.  So, maybe Intlang-send and Intlang-recv    for Interactive-language  would be an acceptable shortening of the names.

The proposal to return to the Accept-Language syntax, with the possibility to list all languages in one media and direction on one line would save us meven more, and should also be considered, I think.

Think about an outgoing call from a clever multi-language call-center with capability in 15 languages, both spoken and written.

/Gunnar

Natasha Rooney | Internet Engineering Director | Internet and Web Team | Technology | GSMA | nrooney@gsma.com<mailto:nrooney@gsma.com> | +44 (0) 7730 219 765 | @thisNatasha | Skype: nrooney@gsm.org<mailto:nrooney@gsm.org>

This email and its attachments are intended for the above named only and may be confidential. If they have come to you in error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone; please reply to this email or call +44 207 356 0600 and highlight the error.

_______________________________________________

SLIM mailing list

SLIM@ietf.org<mailto:SLIM@ietf.org>

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/slim

--

-----------------------------------------

Gunnar Hellström

Omnitor

gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se<mailto:gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se>

+46 708 204 288
_______________________________________________
SLIM mailing list
SLIM@ietf.org<mailto:SLIM@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/slim